Jump to content
The Education Forum

Was it Lansdale?


Guest Mark Valenti
 Share

Recommended Posts

From the lips of Fletcher Prouty:

"They're dressed in brand-new clothes; they've got new shoes on; they have new clothes on, they are not tramps."

Not sure what kind of dinner parties Prouty was invited to, but those tramps are wearing dirty clothes.

The doubts of Jim Garrison are adequately answered by your timeline, Mark, i.e. that shortly before this picture the three tramps (or at least two of them) were at a local Charity place where they took showers, got haircuts and shaves, got a free meal or two, and even got fresh clothes.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 323
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm going to guess you also believe James Files was a shooter.

No, and thank you - I had forgotten that Holt's backing of Files was the other reason I don't believe Chauncey Holt is Old Tramp, and that I don't believe Chauncey Holt in general.

Sorry, though - That is Charles V. Harrelson, sure as you're born. That positive ID lays the groundwork for acceptance of what she says about Holt and Rogers, which can't be supported.

I suspect Gibson was under the spell of Holt and his backers, and the whole presentation is intended to confirm Holt's veracity by presenting his ID between the true ID of Harrelson and the supposed ID of the cipher, Rogers. So it's good that we talked, as it exposes the method used.

But - That is Charles V. Harrelson. Show me photographically how it's one of those old men in the purported photos.

So you support Gibson's ID of Harrelson but you think she was swayed in her ID of Holt and Rogers.

Hmm...

Take a look at all the people in the research community who are right on one thing, but misled or deluded on others. Then extend that out to inquiry and intellectual history in general.

This is different. It's not like saying LHO was impersonated by Batman and then saying Howard Brennan got it wrong.

This is one woman, looking at a one photo and employing the same facial recognition methods, the same aging methods, the same size, height and weight measurements, the same 3D methods to all three tramps.

Yet you say she got one right and was wrong on two others because she was swayed by external pressure.

Not even slightly credible.

She got one right because it is right, and because one is easily led to Harrelson due to his notoriety. She got the other tramp wrong and made unsupported conclusions about the third...because she is easily led. That type of intellectual consistency is commonplace to our species.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mark Valenti

Yeah, I don't think so. That ring in her nose led her to all three incorrect IDs.


She got one right because it is right, and because one is easily led to Harrelson due to his notoriety. She got the other tramp wrong and made unsupported conclusions about the third...because she is easily led. That type of intellectual consistency is commonplace to our species.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark - who, in your words, was LHO? Did he kill or shoot at JFK? If not, who did and why? Just want to get a sense of where you have come to in all this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mark Valenti

Wow, tall order. Got ten years to spare?

LHO thought he was part of an op, just not the one that happened. When he realized he'd been set up, he flipped out and tried to escape. Once arrested, he had something to hide and couldn't be sure how things would play out - maybe he'd bide his time until he could learn more. Still a chance for him to impact the world.

No idea who the shooters were. No way anyone fired from the GK but I could see a shot from the far drain next to the overpass. Ditto a shot from the Dal-Tex, but not from the 2nd floor.

I do not subscribe to any of the extant theories placing well-known personages in DP. No Gordon Arnold, Beverly Oliver, James FIles, Edward Lansdale, Howard Hunt, Charles Harrelson, Frank Sturgis, Chauncey Holt, etc. etc.

Edited by Mark Valenti
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...LHO thought he was part of an op, just not the one that happened. When he realized he'd been set up, he flipped out and tried to escape.

Once arrested, he had something to hide and couldn't be sure how things would play out - maybe he'd bide his time until he could learn more. Still a chance for him to impact the world...

Yes, Mark, I agree with you 100% on this part of your theory. Notice how it fits smoothly in a theory of a right-wing mercenary-fanatic murder of JFK in Dallas.

I agree with Harry Dean this far -- OSWALD was driven to Mexico City by Loran Hall and Larry Howard (partly to test out his bogus FPCC credentials, and) partly to obtain $500 in cash from Guy Gabaldon.

OSWALD completely failed to get Instant Passage into Cuba as he had expected (and had been led to believe by Guy Banister & Co.). If he had been successful, he would have contacted the underground in Cuba to try to kill Fidel Castro. That was his Op. This is confirmed by Loran Hall, who mentioned this to Silvia Odio during his weekend phone call to her.

But since he failed, OSWALD waddled over to see Guy Gabaldon, who (like everybody else in OSWALD's world) was pretending to be a CIA Agent. Gabaldon gave OSWALD $500 with these instructions: "Go back to Dallas and await further instructions."

OSWALD did as he was told. As he waited for further instructions (which never came) he received a call from Gerry Patrick Hemming, a former pal of Loran Hall, and whom OSWALD also knew from his Atsugi days in the Marines. Gerry Patrick Hemming (as he told A.J. Weberman) offered OSWALD double the price of his rifle to bring it to the TSDB in the morning.

OSWALD did that. That was the last business transaction of his life. After that, he was running for his life.

This was exactly as Ex-General Edwin Walker had planned for things to go. Revenge was sweet.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Harry Dean this far -- OSWALD was driven to Mexico City by Loran Hall and Larry Howard (partly to test out his bogus FPCC credentials, and) partly to obtain $500 in cash from Guy Gabaldon.

Paul,

Who do you think was the Oswald who took a bus to Mexico City, sitting next to Albert Osborne and talking with two British and two Australian tourists?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Harry Dean this far -- OSWALD was driven to Mexico City by Loran Hall and Larry Howard (partly to test out his bogus FPCC credentials, and) partly to obtain $500 in cash from Guy Gabaldon.

Paul,

Who do you think was the Oswald who took a bus to Mexico City, sitting next to Albert Osborne and talking with two British and two Australian tourists?

Good question, Ron. In my opinion, most of the "sightings" of OSWALD were fictitious boastings by nut-cases. The others were largely cases of mistaken identity.

Take John Howard Bowen (alias Albert Alexander Osborne), for example, a classic pathological xxxx.

How many people enjoyed their "fifteen minutes of fame" which might never come again, just by claiming that this or that look-alike was really OSWALD?

I won't go into "conspiracy" mode when I learn that the bus records fail to register any Lee Harvey Oswald on board.

I won't go into "conspiracy" mode when I learn that some Mexican border guards reported Lee Harvey Oswald entered Mexico as a passenger in a car.

Most of their accounts have problems of exaggeration, mistaken identity or just fiction. We must remember that Lee Harvey OSWALD was the single most famous (infamous) person in the Western world after the death of JFK, for perhaps a solid year.

It's a scenario just begging for nut-cases to come out of the woodwork.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Harry Dean this far -- OSWALD was driven to Mexico City by Loran Hall and Larry Howard (partly to test out his bogus FPCC credentials, and) partly to obtain $500 in cash from Guy Gabaldon.

Paul,

Who do you think was the Oswald who took a bus to Mexico City, sitting next to Albert Osborne and talking with two British and two Australian tourists?

Good question, Ron. In my opinion, most of the "sightings" of OSWALD were fictitious boastings by nut-cases. The others were largely cases of mistaken identity.

Take John Howard Bowen (alias Albert Alexander Osborne), for example, a classic pathological xxxx.

How many people enjoyed their "fifteen minutes of fame" which might never come again, just by claiming that this or that look-alike was really OSWALD?

Osborne was certainly a xxxx, as it took two or three interviews before he admitted to the FBI that he was Albert Osborne and not John Howard Bowen. But he never boasted to anyone about sitting next to Oswald on the bus. Witnesses said that he did, but Osborne insisted, till the FBI simply decided to quit talking to him, that the person he sat by looked Mexican and spoke no English. And the question is why did he steadfastly maintain to the FBI that he did not sit by anyone who looked like Oswald, despite four English-speaking witnesses who said otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Osborne was certainly a xxxx, as it took two or three interviews before he admitted to the FBI that he was Albert Osborne and not John Howard Bowen. But he never boasted to anyone about sitting next to Oswald on the bus. Witnesses said that he did, but Osborne insisted, till the FBI simply decided to quit talking to him, that the person he sat by looked Mexican and spoke no English. And the question is why did he steadfastly maintain to the FBI that he did not sit by anyone who looked like Oswald, despite four English-speaking witnesses who said otherwise.

Well, Ron, here's my issue with John Armstrong's argument. Knowing that "Osborne" was raging xxxx, then when he says that OSWALD *wasn't* on the bus, then Armstrong uses that as evidence that OSWALD *was* on the bus.

Sorry, that duplicitous logic sinks like a stone. "Osborne" was caught in more lies than I can even count -- lies upon lies and lies about lies -- so why not just dismiss him out of hand? I do.

The English couple in front of this alleged "Oswald" said this about him: (1) he was very talkative; (2) he said nothing about Communism, Castro, Cuba or political issues; and (3) he had thinning, curly, wiry hair.

EXCUSE ME?

That leaves the two girls from Fiji -- but I will be generous with their holey story and say it was "mistaken identity."

Here's my take on it. J. Edgar Hoover ordered the FBI to stick to a Lone Shooter theory at all costs -- or be transferred to the boonies.

So, that means that FBI Agents had to tamper with every sort of evidence, starting on 11/22/1963, and continuing through 10/10/1964, to make it fit. Lying was no obstacle. Hoover was their god. The Truth was DOA.

The bus trip was just another case of tampered evidence.

Lee Harvey OSWALD rode to Mexico City in a car driven by Loran Hall and accompanied by Larry Howard -- right after their 9/25/1963 visit to see Silvia Odio.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Osborne was certainly a xxxx, as it took two or three interviews before he admitted to the FBI that he was Albert Osborne and not John Howard Bowen. But he never boasted to anyone about sitting next to Oswald on the bus. Witnesses said that he did, but Osborne insisted, till the FBI simply decided to quit talking to him, that the person he sat by looked Mexican and spoke no English. And the question is why did he steadfastly maintain to the FBI that he did not sit by anyone who looked like Oswald, despite four English-speaking witnesses who said otherwise.

Well, Ron, here's my issue with John Armstrong's argument. Knowing that "Osborne" was raging xxxx, then when he says that OSWALD *wasn't* on the bus, then Armstrong uses that as evidence that OSWALD *was* on the bus.

Sorry, that duplicitous logic sinks like a stone. "Osborne" was caught in more lies than I can even count -- lies upon lies and lies about lies -- so why not just dismiss him out of hand? I do.

The English couple in front of Oswald said this about "Oswald": (1) he was very talkative; (2) he said nothing about Communism, Castro, Cuba or political issues; and (3) he had thinning, curly, wiry hair.

EXCUSE ME?

That leaves the two girls from Fiji -- but I will be generous with their holey story and say it was "mistaken identity."

Here's my take on it. J. Edgar Hoover ordered the FBI to stick to a Lone Shooter theory at all costs -- or be transferred to the boonies.

So, that means that FBI Agents had to tamper with every sort of evidence, starting on 11/22/1963, and continuing through 10/10/1964, to make it fit. Lying was no obstacle. Hoover was their god. The Truth was DOA.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

There were no girls from Fiji.

--Tommy :sun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Ron, here's my issue with John Armstrong's argument. Knowing that "Osborne" was raging xxxx, then when he says that OSWALD *wasn't* on the bus, then Armstrong uses that as evidence that OSWALD *was* on the bus.

I don't think I made any mention of John Armstrong. We know that Oswald was impersonated on occasion, most notably in Mexico City. And it certainly looks possible that he was impersonated on a bus ride to get there.

"Osborne" was caught in more lies than I can even count -- lies upon lies and lies about lies -- so why not just dismiss him out of hand? I do.

Perhaps he should be dismissed out of hand, but he seems to have had some reason to insist he didn't sit by anyone who looked like Oswald or who even spoke English. And the four witnesses didn't just tell the FBI that this person could have been Oswald. Why would they lie to the FBI about seeing Osborne talking with this person, and about Osborne even talking with them about this person at stops during the trip? Who knows who was lying or why.

Edited by Ron Ecker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Ron, here's my issue with John Armstrong's argument. Knowing that "Osborne" was raging xxxx, then when he says that OSWALD *wasn't* on the bus, then Armstrong uses that as evidence that OSWALD *was* on the bus.

"Osborne" was caught in more lies than I can even count -- lies upon lies and lies about lies -- so why not just dismiss him out of hand? I do.

I don't think I made any mention of John Armstrong. We know that Oswald was impersonated on occasion, most notably in Mexico City. And it certainly looks possible that he was impersonated on a bus ride to get there.

Perhaps he should be dismissed out of hand, but he seems to have had some reason to insist he didn't sit by anyone who looked like Oswald or who even spoke English. And the four witnesses didn't just tell the FBI that this person could have been Oswald. Why would they lie to the FBI about seeing Osborne talking with this person, and about Osborne even talking with them about this person at stops during the trip? Who knows who was lying or why.

OK, Ron, I admit that it remains possible that somebody Impersonated OSWALD on the bus, going by the reports of the other three English-speaking witnesses -- at least to a point.

As for the IMPERSONATION that shocked the CIA in Mexico City, and started a Mole-hunt (cf. Bill Simpich, 2014) the leader of that IMPERSONATION was likely CIA officer David Morales, who looked Mexican and had a Latino accent. Now, Morales had a crew -- and we don't know who they were.

So, it's possible -- only possible -- that David Morales also set up an "Imposter" on that bus trip to claim to be OSWALD, and make himself known -- to the two girls from Fiji and the couple in front of OSWALD.

I will admit the possibility.

Yet the character of this "Imposter" isn't Lee Harvey Oswald -- who was anything but talkative around strangers; and when he did speak, it was in a sullen tone, and most often about his politics of a radical nature.

This talkative, outgoing, friendly guy who wanted to share his life story and the best places to stay in Mexico City does not match the Lee Harvey Oswald who was Marina's husband. Do you agree?

*** The most telling fact is that the Bus Line manifest did not have Lee Harvey Oswald as a passenger.

So, to be generous -- let us say that the Non-Osborne passengers were all telling gospel Truth. We see, then, a deliberate OSWALD Imposter, outgoing and friendly, with "thinning, curly, wiry hair."

Insofar as some right-wing rogue of a CIA mole bothered to IMPERSONATE Oswald in Mexico City (starting a mole-hunt inside the CIA), then the best explanation is that the same Team that made the Sunday call from the Cuban consulate to the USSR consulate was the same Team that sent this "Imposter" into that bus into Mexico.

What, then, of the real Lee Harvey Oswald (Marina's husband)? I say he entered Mexico by automobile, as the Mexican border guards said he did.

The most generous I can be in this scenario is to leave "Osborne" out of it. I already suspected David Morales of playing along with Guy Banister during the summer of 1963. I can bend this far.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This talkative, outgoing, friendly guy who wanted to share his life story and the best places to stay in Mexico City does not match the Lee Harvey Oswald who was Marina's husband. Do you agree?

Certainly. It was apparently an imposter. And it makes perfect sense that whoever set up the Oswald impersonation in Mexico City, whom you believe to be Morales, would have had an Oswald imposter make a bus trip to get there.

*** The most telling fact is that the Bus Line manifest did not have Lee Harvey Oswald as a passenger.

The passenger list for that trip was confiscated by the Mexican government. The FBI had to use immigration records and a baggage list to ID passengers. One would think a baggage list would be enough, as I assume it would include who the baggage belonged to. But it raises the question of what reason the Mexican government would have to confiscate the passenger list. The only thing I can think of is a request from the U.S. government to suppress the fact that Oswald wasn't really on the bus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What, then, of the real Lee Harvey Oswald (Marina's husband)? I say he entered Mexico by automobile, as the Mexican border guards said he did.

Paul, I'm not familiar with the Mexican border guards evidence. Could you elaborate?

Thanks,

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...